2 of 2

The issue is similar to the school voucher case in Cleveland that the Supreme Court decided in favor of. However, in the Davey case, the state might be forced to fund religious instruction, rather than giving individuals the option to attend religious schools. Many reports say because of states' "Blaine Amendments" school voucher programs have not expanded as expected after the Cleveland decision.

At the core of the argument is whether Washington State's higher wall of separation violates the federal Constitution's provision for free exercise of religion. The Chicago Tribunerecords this interaction during Tuesday's arguments:

Justice John Paul Stevens questioned how state officials, in denying Davey the scholarship, had hampered his ability to practice his religion.

"Can't he practice his religion just as he always would and become a minister?" Stevens asked. "He just has to pay for it."

Responded Olson: "He can practice but he practices it at a price."

"He practices it without a subsidy," Stevens shot back.

Said Olson: "He practices it without the same subsidy that is made available to every other citizen except someone who wants to study to be a minister."

A decision is expected in several months. In the meantime, The Los Angeles Times has an interesting profile of Sekulow.

Copyright © 2003 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

Suggest links and stories by sending e-mail to weblog@christianitytoday.com

What is Weblog?

Check out Books & Culture's weblog, Content & Context.

See our past Weblog updates:

December 3 | 2 | 1

November 26 | 25b | 25a | 24

November 21 | 20 | 19 | 18 | 17

November 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10

November 7b | 7a | 6 | 5 | 3

October 31 | 30 | 29 | 28 | 27

October 24 | 23 | 22 | 21

and more, back to November 1999

first page |  2 of 2

share this page

December (Web-only) 2003, Vol. 47